1. :-\ will this solve the problem or just raise the cost of buying players? IMO this fee should instead be based on the difference between offered bid and "automatic" base wage...thus, if base salary is not increased, there is zero signing on fee. Anyway, I just hope managers can no longer win players with bids that put their wage budget beyond the limit the player room quality allows...
Totally support you point!
It's unacceptable to pay 30*wage as signing on fee, the base wage must be deducted. For example, if I want buy a CA9 players whose value is ove 1.2M, and the base wage he asks is 20,000G+, this means I have to pay at least 600,000G signing on fee. And if you wanna win the bit, you have to pay even more. The cost is to much.
1. :-\ will this solve the problem or just raise the cost of buying players? IMO this fee should instead be based on the difference between offered bid and "automatic" base wage...thus, if base salary is not increased, there is zero signing on fee. Anyway, I just hope managers can no longer win players with bids that put their wage budget beyond the limit the player room quality allows...I agree with Brian, signing on fee should be deference between base (asked) wage and offered wage * 30. For example if i'm the only one who bid for player who let's say ask 7000 G p/w, why should be forced to pay 210k more for the player when there is no other manager to compete with.
Yes, Archie brought up serious issue.Thank you :)
1. :-\ will this solve the problem or just raise the cost of buying players? IMO this fee should instead be based on the difference between offered bid and "automatic" base wage...thus, if base salary is not increased, there is zero signing on fee. Anyway, I just hope managers can no longer win players with bids that put their wage budget beyond the limit the player room quality allows...
I have to say some changes are nice. But I think you have to do some thing to attract new players. They can only get 40% from their initial players. So they can't develop enough to catch up old players and they may be easy to give up this game since they have no motivation to go on.Support, I think admin should more consider the interests of new game player, so that they can have more game player to join the GKO?
Please give them at least 60% for their initial players!
Who will get the money from "Signing On Fee"? Seller club? The player? Gamemaster? ???Yeah really goog question... i dont want to lose just like that hard earned money ???
1. :-\ will this solve the problem or just raise the cost of buying players? IMO this fee should instead be based on the difference between offered bid and "automatic" base wage...thus, if base salary is not increased, there is zero signing on fee. Anyway, I just hope managers can no longer win players with bids that put their wage budget beyond the limit the player room quality allows...
Assume, if i want bid at least
100 g for his value
+ 800 g for wage
+ 30 x 800 g for Signing on fee
That mean I must pay 24,500 g !!!!
This is over unrealistic price.
Assume, if i want bid at least
100 g for his value
+ 800 g for wage
+ 30 x 800 g for Signing on fee
That mean I must pay 24,500 g !!!!
This is over unrealistic price.
That's why the signing on fee is better if we take salary difference x 30. That means next regarding to your example:
Asking price: 100 g
Asking wage: 800 g
You offer:
Transfer fee: 100 g
Wage: 900 g
Price will be: 100+(900-800)x30=3100 g, which is not too high.
But if you offer hudge wage like 10000 g, then final price will be:
100+(10000-800)x30=276100 g
That rule will definitely prevent absurdly high wages.
But if the rule stays wage x 30, it will be impossible to by players with naturally high wages, which means it will be impossible to by players with high CA!
Assume, if i want bid at least
100 g for his value
+ 800 g for wage
+ 30 x 800 g for Signing on fee
That mean I must pay 24,500 g !!!!
This is over unrealistic price.
That's why the signing on fee is better if we take salary difference x 30. That means next regarding to your example:
Asking price: 100 g
Asking wage: 800 g
You offer:
Transfer fee: 100 g
Wage: 900 g
Price will be: 100+(900-800)x30=3100 g, which is not too high.
But if you offer hudge wage like 10000 g, then final price will be:
100+(10000-800)x30=276100 g
That rule will definitely prevent absurdly high wages.
But if the rule stays wage x 30, it will be impossible to by players with naturally high wages, which means it will be impossible to by players with high CA!
1. :-\ will this solve the problem or just raise the cost of buying players? IMO this fee should instead be based on the difference between offered bid and "automatic" base wage...thus, if base salary is not increased, there is zero signing on fee. Anyway, I just hope managers can no longer win players with bids that put their wage budget beyond the limit the player room quality allows...
so any user that pretends to buy one of those will need 600k extra even if he is the only bidder, it's too high!I do and think many too. Today I lost very good player becuase of wage fight :(
Assume, if i want bid at least
100 g for his value
+ 800 g for wage
+ 30 x 800 g for Signing on fee
That mean I must pay 24,500 g !!!!
This is over unrealistic price.
1. :-\ will this solve the problem or just raise the cost of buying players? IMO this fee should instead be based on the difference between offered bid and "automatic" base wage...thus, if base salary is not increased, there is zero signing on fee. Anyway, I just hope managers can no longer win players with bids that put their wage budget beyond the limit the player room quality allows...
+10001. :-\ will this solve the problem or just raise the cost of buying players? IMO this fee should instead be based on the difference between offered bid and "automatic" base wage...thus, if base salary is not increased, there is zero signing on fee. Anyway, I just hope managers can no longer win players with bids that put their wage budget beyond the limit the player room quality allows...
+1
2. We will increase the amount of transfer value when selling a player, which is promoted from your academy. (Previous system = 35%)
Does this mean, that if i want a player, then it is reasonable to buy it this season (before the end), because the same player will cost more in the next season?
Assuming that i will find a player, where the others have not offered big wages.
Update : http://forum.gokickoff.com/index.php?topic=12418.msg95762#msg95762;) one thing must be considered... the base wage may be changed in 3 days( player's value will change) , how to calculate the fee ?
Update : http://forum.gokickoff.com/index.php?topic=12418.msg95762#msg95762
[Signing On Fee = 50 x (Offered Wage - Base Wage).] (Base Wage is the estimated wage by the system)
Yap.Quote[Signing On Fee = 50 x (Offered Wage - Base Wage).] (Base Wage is the estimated wage by the system)
That's mean if I buy player and [Offered Wage] equal [Base Wage], for example
Signing On Fee = 50 x (3,870 - 3870) = 0 g
I don't understand clearly.
that means if we pay the price demanded, example 1,000,000 and besides we must pay 50 x salary?.
or we must pay the biggest of 1,000,000 & 50 x salary only?.
thanks in advance.
But who takes the player? The largest wage offered,largest bid? Old system with X% factor is crap.I don't understand clearly.
that means if we pay the price demanded, example 1,000,000 and besides we must pay 50 x salary?.
or we must pay the biggest of 1,000,000 & 50 x salary only?.
thanks in advance.
You will need to pay the tax ONLY if you offer a higher wage than requested, you can avoid to pay the tax if you are the only bidder and don't offer more than requested weekly wage.
But who takes the player? The largest wage offered,largest bid? Old system with X% factor is crap.I don't understand clearly.
that means if we pay the price demanded, example 1,000,000 and besides we must pay 50 x salary?.
or we must pay the biggest of 1,000,000 & 50 x salary only?.
thanks in advance.
You will need to pay the tax ONLY if you offer a higher wage than requested, you can avoid to pay the tax if you are the only bidder and don't offer more than requested weekly wage.
Admin, I have few questions.
1. Is "signing on fee" valid for free players?
2. Who will get the money from "signing on fee" when I sell my player-me or nobody?
1. We will introduce "Signing On Fee" which is the amount of money that a team need to pay to the player upon bidding success.It's still 85%
[Signing On Fee = 50 x (Offered Wage - Base Wage).] (Base Wage is the estimated wage by the system)
This system will decrease the problem of unreasonable offered wages.
Example : Bid a player for 500K and offer wage for 10K (Base Wage = 3K ) => Must pay Signing On Fee for 50 x (10K - 3K)
2. We will increase the amount of transfer value when selling a player, which is promoted from your academy. (Previous system = 35%)
3. We will increase the bonus of the transfer value when selling a player, which is promoted from your academy, from 5% to 10%.
This means that you receive at most 80% + 10% = 90% when selling any player promoted from your academy.
4. The percentage of money a team receives from selling a player will increase faster than the previous version.
We use straight line model for the previous version, whereas we will use curve model for the new version.
This means that at the beginning the percentage of money will increase faster. (This change applies to all players.)